About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
CNNW 70
LANGUAGE
English 70
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 70 (some duplicates have been removed)
to reduce the deficit, 63% said no. 86% of the ads run for obama were personal attacks on romney. he won a stunning mandate to not be romney. he did not run on the basis he was going to do massive new spending and the kind of tax increases, $1.6 trillion that he's now talking about. and at the same time that obama was elected president, the republican house, which had twice voted for a real budget -- remember, the president's budget he claims he has a mandate for was put up before the house and the democrats all voted against it. in the senate, the democrats didn't want to have anything to do with it. it's a little hard to argue, he had a mandate for something the rest of his party ran away from. >> well -- >> did not run ads on those issues. >> and, of course, it was a bit more complicated than that. but to your point about the exit polls, it's true, most people said that they didn't want tax increases to solve the deficit. what they said -- the majority, was they wanted both balanced. they wanted cuts and tax increases. which is what both john boehner and the president -- in very strid
are good. if you look at the deficit, much higher in the u.s. than in the euro zone, for instance, debt, higher than many countries in the euro zone including spain, germany, france. yet, the united states of america is able to borrow at the lowest rate in pretty much it's recorded history. so you have a very, very diverse landscape at the moment, but certainly would that could be significantly improved, or worsened by the situation that we have concerning the fiscal cliff, the fiscal deficit, and the debt of the country, three topics that can be addressed now on a comprehensive and efficient fashion. >> so what should this mean? i think i could interpret any given number, to think oh, that means we should not touch taxes for any bracts, because it's as much money as we could have in it, or this means that we need more stimulus to keep the jobs going, or i could look at the debt and say this means we need to cut spending, so what does it mean? what would you, and what globally, what would mean the most for the u.s. to do? >> you know what you said? you would qualify as an economist. on
they erase the trust deficit, every time they do it, they make it harder to do the big stuff. >> ken, notwithstanding the problems whef outlined in this conversation and the problems coming from washington, there is some economic renaissance going on. we've got low energy prices, manufacturing input. this housing boom with more interest rating here to stay for a couple of years. is there enough that can happen in this economy to off set what's happening? >> we can't ignore them. i wish i could say that. if they blow it, there's nothing we can do, but i think the risks are becoming more balanced where things like the housing recov recovery, consumer debt coming down are start tog offer the possibility where growth might be a little stronger. although on the other hand, the europe and many things you mentioned, all these uncertainty mentioned it could be lower. we're less vulnerable than we were, but if they don't strike a deal, i think they will, they may go over january 1st so the republicans can say taxes went up even though they give in on the tax hikes for the 2%. >> stay where yo
with a balanced approach. deficit reduction. >> after the president's remarks, i spoke with his main man on the fiscal cliff, treasury secretary tim geithner. >> let me ask you, the reaction to your going up on the hill and saying this is basically the white house position has been -- mitch mcconnell saying i think it was just demeaning for them to ask the treasury secretary to come up here and give a proposal like this and by this we have people saying it's a sham, it's -- you know, ridiculous, it's a nonstarter. when you went up there, you didn't think republicans were going to go "good idea." >> you know, what we're trying to do is get these guys to come together and reach an agreement that's going to be good for the country and good for the economy. >> by these guys you mean you all and the republicans. >> and democrats together. >> and the white house. >> that's what we're trying to do. what we did was put forward a very comprehensive, very carefully designed mix of savings and tax reforms to help us put us back on the path to stabilizing our debt and fixing our debt and living with
play special interest dig in. until they erase the trust deficit, every time they do it incrementally they make it harder to do the big stuff. >> notwithstanding the problems in this conversation and notwithstanding problems from washington, there is some economic renaissance that's brewing under the surface here. we have an energy boom going on, low energy prices. we have manufacturing output increasing in this country. we have the housing boom with low interest rates to stay for a couple of yearses. is there enough that could happen that could offset what's going on in washington? can we grow our way out of this? >> we can't ignore them. if they blow it, there is nothing we can do. the risks are becoming more balanced where things like the housing recovery, consumer debt coming down are starting to offer the possibility where growth might be stronger although it could be lower. it's more balanced. i think they will strike a deal. they may go after january 1 so the republicans can say taxes went up. now we're cutting taxes though they give in on the tax cuts for the 2%. >> stay where
who actually came up with a plan to cut the deficit, a plan that everyone hailed as magnificent but no one wanted to adopt. >>> joining me now is cnn contributor will cain. he leans right. good morning, will. >> good morning. let me tell you something. you said the popularity of gangnam style knows no limits. i beg to differ. >> you do? >> i think we just found its limits, when 8-year-olds start doing gangnam style you can count on its popularity decreasing. we're about a year away from it being makarena. >> trying to get two sides come together to come to a deal on the fiscal cliff. >> i don't know about young people's abilities to force cats and dogs and democrats and republicans to come together to find a deal. he had a much more profound message than just simply dancing in that clip, in that psa essentially. he was trying to alert young people to the fact that old people, bluntly, are organized. look at the army of aarp representatives that ensure that programs like medicare and social security, programs that take up something like 50% of our federal budget will remain intac
discussed for more than a year and a half on the campaign trail, $4 trillion of balanced deficit reduction. weight not a real proposal what is john boehner sent to the white house which actually lowered rates for those at the top but asked the middle class to bear the entire burden of deficit reduction. that's not what the american people voted for. i mean if you look at even cnn's exit polls all over this country, upwards of 60, 65% of people voted for balanced deficit reduction, which means asking those at the top to pay their fair share. more people voted for that, the idea of that, then they voted for the president. so we need to look to the american people and look what they want on how to reduce the deficit. we have to do it in a balanced way and fair way. >> but if you look at polling and i know you don't always just go on polling, right, but polling is also -- you ask people what should be cut, 79% say don't cut medicare at all and i think that lots of things, democrats and republicans have said, that is on the table too. you don't always necessarily follow the polls when you liste
and supporting unspecified r revenue hikes to help cut the deficit. and big business resigned to higher taxes. here is lloyd blankfein. >> we had to lift up the marginal rate. >> norquist's response? >> some of these people have had impure thoughts. no one pulled the trigger and voted for a tax increase. >> to be sure, norquist is still raking in big bucks. according to open secrets.org, he shelled out almost $14 million to defeat democratic opponents in this past election cycle. >> we've run ads to let people know who has taken the pledge and who hasn't. we'll do phones into letting people know who is taking the pledge. >> norquist's big backers are republican operatives, cross roads gps, the super pac led by kingpin karl rove and the center to protect patient rights. closely tied to the ultra conservative cook brothers. they account for a majority of the budget and there's no sign that they're running scared. norquist truly believes that the best way to grow the economy is to tame big government. he told me recently he will be vindicated no matter how many politicians break the pledge. what
adds so much to the federal budget deficit. so republicans say raise the retirement age to 67 or means testing, meaning making more wealthy americans pay more into the system or get less out of the system. if you means test, that means you're paying less out to affluent americans. if you raise the retirement age, you're paying out less as money comes in and keeping the revenue line closer to the cost line. that is the goal. so when you do a 10 or 20-year calculation, medicare is not adding to the deficit. but that's the policy and just as republicans are having a backlash against the speaker saying we don't think we should put tax increases on the table, the democrats and some of the new members in congress, they say they ran promising not to touch medicare. so they say they won't do this. so you have the credibility challenge. republicans say give us entitlement and other spending cuts and the democrats want higher tax rates. that's why we have a stalemate. >>> an internet icon wanted in connection with the killing of his neighbor. stay with us, you're in "the situation room." that of
it's not 17% of our debt because right now we have a trillion dollar deficit every single year. if we went back to zero, that's true. right now with fourth year in a row with over a trillion dollars in deficit spending, that deficit and debt continues it to climb. it doesn't wipe it out. what does it do to the overall economy. we're not just dealing with one tax increase right now. the affordable care act actually begin on january 1st as well for people making $200,000 or more or people with large medical bills. that already starts coming up. this is an additional tax increase on top of that tax increase. >> what about what bill clinton said? he said once things start to get better, and that's a crucial point he was making. he wasn't saying doing it right away. once it gets better, taxes go up on the middle class. do you agree with that? >> i don't, actually. the reason being is that right now if you look at the real math on it, in 2007 and 2012 we have the same amount of revenue. obviously 2008 and '09 we had a dramatic drop in federal revenues coming in. we've slowly climbed back up
. a long-term debt and deficit problems, and these are the folks who have to fix it. how close are they? >> i think we're going over the cliff. >> we can't sit here and try to figure out what works for them. >> we look forward to the time when they are specific. >> they need to be more specific. >> they have to be willing to come to the table with specifics. >> we've not had any discussion and specifics with this president about the real problem. >> we need a response from the white house. we can't sit here and negotiate with ourselves. >> i will not play that game. >> further apart than ever. you've heard endless arguing about higher taxes on the rich. let's set that aside and talk about the sequester the budget wonk word for a thing that will touch every american. $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts over the next decade, 100 billion next year alone, half in defense and half in non-defense, defense programs cut by 9.4% across the board and non-defense programs 8.2%. agencies are being told to identify the cuts. how will you feel them? fewer food inspections are likely. cdc budget cu
thought you should take a look. it totals $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years. the part that stood out to us was $600 billion in proposed savings in medicare reforms. how? in part by raising the age of eligibility to 65 to maybe 67. turning down the gop proposal, dan pfieffer said, quote, it provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which medicare savings they would achieve." let's head now to the white house and dan lothian. the white house will not offer a counter proposal, right? what's going on here? >> reporter: well, you know, i think the white house is digging in. the president said early on in this process that he would only sit down and really move forward, negotiate on this in any meaningful way if the tax hikes for the wealthy expired. and republicans have been pushing back on that -- tax breaks rather for the wealthy expired and republicans have been pushing back on that, say they go believe that will be harmful for the economic recovery because wealthy americans are the ones who are creating the jobs and
that calls for $2.2 trillion in deficit savings. it includes $800 billion in tax reforms, 600 billion in medicare reforms and 600 billion in spending cuts. because it doesn't contain tax hikes for the wealthiest americans or specifics about which loopholes will be eliminated, the president immediately rejected the republican proposal. want to know how far apart democrats and republicans are? listen to this. >> i think we're going over the cliff. >> it's unfortunate the white house has spent three weeks doing basically nothing. >> what we can't do is sit here trying to figure out what works for them. >> the president's idea of negotiation is roll over and do what i ask. >> it's clear to me they made a political calculation. if their ideas are different from ours, we can't guess what they are. >> they need to be more specific. >> some specificity from them. >> he can't be serious. >> haven't even begun to be serious. >> we need to get serious. >> i don't think they're serious. >> i would say we're nowhere. period. we're nowhere. >> hard to disagree with that. we're nowhere. period. >> t
're running a trillion dollar deficit year single year. if we went back to zero, we're rebalanced. right now with the fourth year in a row, that deficit and debt continues to climb. so it doesn't really wipe it out and the challenge of it is what does that do to the overall economy. we're not just dealing with one tax increase as well. a lot of people lose track of that. the affordable care about actually begin on january 1st as well for people making $200,000 or more. or people having large medical bills. this is talking about an additional tax increase on top of that. >> what about what bill clinton said? he said once things start to get better and that's a crucial point he was making. once the economy starts to get better, taxes have to go up on the middle class. do you agree? is. >> i don't, actually. and the reason being is that right now, if you look at the real math, in 2007 and 012, we have the same amount of revenue. now, 2008 and 2009, we had a dramatic drop in federal revenues, but we've slowly climbed back up. revenue has gone up every year of the obama administration and now, we
in this particular conference which was elected to be a fiscally conservative and try to reduce the deficit. however, myself and members of our team were standing outside and talked to dozens of members and it does seem as though internally he didn't get an earful. they are very upset that the counteroffer includes $800 billion in new tack revenue but behind the scenes he's been able to hold the conference together and they are staying unified behind him in going forward with the process and the speaker was asked why that is. here's what he said. >> our members understand the seriousness of the situation that our country faces. trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. $16 trillion worth of debt already on the books. every man, woman, and child owing the government over $50,000 and that number is increasing every single year. and i think as a result our members understand that we've got to solve the problem and we will. >> so the bottom line is it really seems obvious, especially after talking to members coming out of that meeting, that they have been able to at least so far turn the r
medicare, medicaid and social security to be used as part of a deficit-reducing bill in such a short period of time. >> the clock is winding down toward the fiscal cliff. once considered an untouchable third rail, changes for social security and other so called entitlementeds are now being seriously discussed. >> we really have not begun to talk about real entitlement reforms. the only way to have a true avoidance is to mix an appropriate amount of revenues with true retirement reform. until the debate moves to that point, there's really no serious debate taking place. squeezing out savings from social security by changing the way inflation is calculated and possible means testing that could disqualify wealthier, older americans from the medicare program. lawmakers insist any changes will be done gradually and will not impact current retirees. but that's not soothing the fears of senior who is say inflation adjustments will have an immediate impact. >> to tell someone who's living on social security, one out of every flthree relies on just social security for their income, to tell them i'm
has risen by 26% against the dollar and that's not going to cure our trade deficit with china. we need to save more in this country and w count country and we need to get a handle on this deficit problem. but ronald reagan didn't get us into any wars, we had a police action in grenada, in eight years, that was it, yeah, you got to be strong, you got to maintain a strong national defense, fight against budget cuts and so forth. but unless there's a very large national interest involved, it can -- it's sometimes very counter productive to engage in some of these activities overseas, where right now, for instance, there's a lot of pressure on president obama to intervene militarily in syria, that would be the worst thing in the world we could do in my opinion. we should support the syrian opposition, politically, diplomatically, economically, but not militarily, because t t that's a slippery slope once you get into it. >> not even a no fly zone? >> i don't know, if you start a no fly zone, you got to get into the anti-aircraft batteries. but the government is going to fall. so i think th
put together a plan to move us towards some kind of deficit reduction package eventually evolved into the simpson-bowles commission plan. but the point i was making and i think the speaker is making is republicans have not come out here with some hardball, crazy off-the-table negotiation. what they have done is put something that bill clinton's former chief of staff at one time odd voe indicated for. and i think in the end that reflects that we are moving toward the potential compromise deal. >> he said -- >> i think i'm inappropriately in the middle here. i ought to be over there on the left. what bowles said yesterday was i was testifying before congress, and i described that as a midpoint between what republicans want and what democrats wanted. it was not what i would recommend. but i don't think that's even relevant. >> -- circumstances have changed since then. >> i don't even think that's relevant. i think the real question here and i think ron's right about this is are tax rates going to go up? yes, they're going to go up, because republicans are not going to have to vote f
, not just to avoid the damage of the sequester but to help reduce our long-term deficit. >> i was disappointed by the president's proposal. i think it is essentially a rerun of his budget proposal. the revenue proposals are $1.6 trillion in revenue and tax increases. it's a massive tax increase. but also not significant and meaningful in entitlement reforms. >> so, anna, i hear comments like those and remarks by john boehner and the president of the united states and i wonder after the election, did we learn anything? because i -- my reading on the election was that the people, the voters wanted compromise. and for the people in washington to talk to each other not at each other. that still appears to be what they're doing, no? >> i think right after the election that was the message that even president obama and john boehner and the entire leadership, we saw that incredible image of the minority and majority leaders on both houses come out saying things that sounded like they were going to cooperate. but, you know, only in washington can that mean nothing quickly. but i do th
offer a counter proposal on the fiscal cliff. their plan, $2.2 trillion deficit savings over the next decade, but it does not include higher tax rates for the wealthy. the house speaker john boehner calls it a credible plan that deserves serious consideration by the white house. guess what? the white house released a statement tonight saying the plan is nothing new, that it lowers rates for the wealthy and sticks the middle class with the bill. so to borrow a phrase, we're nowhere. period. david walker is president and ceo of comeback america initiative. he's made it his mission to promote fiscal responsibility. he joins us along with cnn political analyst, david gergen. the house republicans put forward their counter proposal. speaker boehner says it's credible and the white house should consider it. is it credible or is it more of what you have called the irresponsible unethical immoral behavior of all the politicians here in washington? >> i think both sides are now putting things on the table but i think they're confused. what we have to do in the short term is avoid the fiscal cl
of time. we were very concerned because we thought the budget was going to be -- the deficit was going to be about $150 billion. that shocked everyone into action. then, unlike now, there remains some degree of bipartisanship. there was comity, there was discussion, even as we battled over the budget, we worked together in a bipartisan way on many other issues. you didn't have the total polarization that you have today. >> i mean, when you were elected senate majority leader, i understand one of the first people that you called was the minority leader, senator dole. >> that's right. i called him right away, i went to see him almost immediately, and i said to him look, you've been here a long time, i'm relatively new, these are very tough jobs in the best of circumstances, and if we don't have some degree of trust between us, they will be impossible jobs. so i said to him i want to tell you how i intend to behave toward you and to ask that you behave towards me in the same way. and we agreed on the most basic of things. i told him i would not surprise him, that's important in the senate
to bring in a man who says president obama's plan would create jobs and cut the deficit. he's democratic congressman chris van hollen, maryland, ranking member of the house budget committee. welcome to you, sir. you said today -- >> good to be with you. >> good to be with you, too. we're in the fourth quarter as we approach the fiscal cliff. if we can deliver like rg iii delivers, we'll be doing well. the question i would ask is why the hell are we in the fourth quarter? why wasn't this done in the first quarter? >> well, piers, as you know, there were a number of efforts before the election to get this done and there were major differences between the parties, and those parties became a big part of the conversation during the presidential debate. the president could not have been clearer that he wanted to do two things. he wanted to boost economic growth by doing things like investing in our infrastructure which used to be a bipartisan idea, but also, extending middle class tax cuts and as you said, asking the wealthiest to pay a little bit more to reduce the deficit. that was part of t
to deficit reduction that can help give businesses certainty and make sure the country grows. and unfortunately the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. he talks, for example, about $800 billion worth of revenues, but he says he's going to do that by lowering rates. when you look at math, it doesn't work. >> reporter: so unbalanced approach is the white house's nice way of saying you got to be kidding me. jay carney used the phrase in the briefing just now that the proposal from the republicans was a bunch of magic needs and fairy dust and the current standoff is continuing with neither side talking today, brooke. >> magic beans, fairy dust, la la land, it is laughable but not. it is serious stuff that affects every one of us come january 1st, 28 days to go. we know some of the reporting from dana bash on the hill, there are no formal talks going on. the president insists in speaking in this bloomberg interview, he does speak to speaker boehner all the time that the meetings are not what matter. what have you, jessica yellin what have you learned in your repo
are the one that is are going to be handed down the $16 trillion deficit. it is hard for this to play out. they will come to some sort of a deal. you are going to see them come to a deal. you are going to see them with something sort of like the simpson bowles. >> pam has sent it to the public. that if it goes over the fiscal cliff republicans are prepared to make the middle class pay more tax paying more. and that is a very bad position for the republicans to find themselves in isn't it? >> sit a very bad position for them to find themselves in. the fact of the matter is, it isn't true. the taxes on the wealthiest americans, it doesn't address the core problems. the $16 trillion comes from government over spending and we have slow growth. raising the taxes on anybody whether it is on the poor or the other americans doesn't solve the problem. let's get in and figure out what the key problems are and solve those. i made an analogy earlier to giving a kid more allowance. i stopped paying them. >> i mean un believable. so kate, middleton, is in hospital with this morning sickness and reveale
warned that he won't meet his deficit targets for austerity will have to continue. we expect higher taxes on the rich tomorrow, cuts in public spending, and in this environment the multinationals like google, amazon, starbucks, are very firmly in the firing line. after all what better than to attack big corporate america. and they're being told, smell the coffee. i can play that game, too, michael. >> wake up and smell the coffee. always good to see you, mr. quest. always making it simple for us. richard quest in london. probably didn't pay for that coffee. >>> over the weekend, the palestinians celebrated their new status recognized by the united nations. the joy short-lived. how israel's decision to pursue even more settlements in the west bank and east jerusalem may kill any hopes of peace. we'll dive deep lie into this issue. >>> rp says it's not changing plans for the controversial housing development in east of jerusalem also developments in east jerusalem. this is despite getting a diplomatic mackdown recently from australia, five european countries and the united states bought in
agreed on where we need to be. they want to agree if they can bring down the deficit in terms of bringing more taxes in terms of revenue or cutting spending. and the third leg of that is something we don't know. how can we make the economy grow, if the economy grows faster, then we don't need to cut as much and we don't need as much revenue. the growth of the economy is in a way the fuzziest of all these things, because you don't know how fast, you can have estimates, you do have, the birth in the hand is you know you can bring in more revenue if you raise taxes on the wealthiest americans. you know you can save money if you cut entitlements. the question is how far do we want to go down the road of solving the problem. some people may say, we don't have to get all the way, as long as we make progress and we show to americans that you guys are in good hands with us, because at least we're going in the right direction, right now we can't even say that. >> right, so really that's what the wild card is, and what's so interesting, is you know, all of these things have a price tag. you raise t
not represent the bowles simpson plan, nor is it the bowles plan in my testimony on deficit reduction. i simply took the mid point of the public offers, put forward during the negotiations to demonstrate where i thought a deal could be reached at the time. he's very much backing away from speaker boehner's letter. the question i wanted to ask you is some of the details, as you know, it's all in. >> can we spin one more point on that? >> absolutely. >> here's speaker boehner who is taking a mid point on the compromise between the two sides and offered it, and it's already flatley rejected? >> i think he may be rejected, sir, if i may -- >> i'm not talking about simpson -- erskine boelsz. i'm talking about the white house's response to it. >> let's get to that too. i think what erskine bowles is saying in his statement, that this letter from speaker boehner does not represent his theory, number one, but i think the line that the white house is having problems with, and i believe i found it in page two of the speaker's letter, i'll read it to you if i can. he says this, notably, the new revenue in
to be handed down the $60 trillion deficit. they will come to a deal. but right now, it's political theater. and it's probably going to look like the simpson-bowles. that will come full-circle again. >> here's a problem the republicans have got themselves into. is obama has been very clever here, the president. i think what he's done is skillfully said to the public, if he goes over the fiscal cliff, the republicans are prepared to make the entire middle class to pay more tax to save 2% of the wealthiest americans paying a little bit more. and that's a very bad position for the republicans to find themselves in, isn't it? >> it certainly is. it's a very bad position for them to find themselves in. the fact of the matter, it isn't true. raising taxes on the wealthiest americans will not only solve the problems. it doesn't even address the core problems. the core problems, $16 trillion in national debt comes from government overspending. and we have sluggish growth. raising the taxes on anybody, whether it's the poor or the middle class or the wealthiest americans, doesn't solve that problem.
much deficit reduction. too much spending cuts. when the private sector, when businesses and consumers are not spending, what we need is for government to be the spender of last resort. we don't want to go into major spending cuts. that's the austerity trap that europe has found itself in, and it would be crazy for us to go in that direction. >> before we go, very quickly, yes or no. do we have a deal by the end of the year? >> yes. >> and what about you, doug? >> marginally, yes. 60/40 in favor of a deal but they've got to get moving. >> we'll have to see if it's a real deal or another kick of the can down the road or some other interim thing. thanks for being here. >>> "outfront" next, the u.s. military draws up new plans for a potential strike against syria as we learn more about that country's stockpile of chemical weapons. >>> plus -- the u.s. supreme court agrees to take on the issue of gay marriage. and is that a signal, is that a signal that for republicans, it may be time to reconsider its view on this? >>> and a nurse duped by a prank call leaking information about the duches
signed into law last year. but if we're serious about reducing our deficit while still investing in things like education and research that are important to growing our economy, and if we're serious about protecting middle class families then we're also going to have to ask the wealthiest americans to pay higher tax rates. that is one principle i wouldn't compromise on. >> speaker john boehner has a different view. he says the president needs to abandon what he called his "my way or the highway approach," in his words. if the president does that a lot of things are possible. >>> syrian rebels are battling army units around the capital. activists say 26 people were killed in the damascus suburbs today, while 29 more were killed around the country. meanwhile, the u.s. and other officials warning against chemical weapons. syria says it would never use the chemical weapons against its own people but warns that terrorists could use it against the people. >>> and linebacker jerry brown, a dallas cowboy, a member of the team's practice squad was pronounced dead at the hospital. he was r
to the entitlement reform portion of this deficit reduction plan. that's politically very tricky, as you know, because a lot of times dealing with entitlements will be construed as cuts to medicare and that's often not very popular. as you can imagine that deal that you just outlined, not received very well by republicans on the hill. >> i think we're going over the cliff. it's pretty clear to me they've made a political calculation. this offer doesn't remotely deal with entitlement reform in a way to save medicare and medicaid, and social security from imminent bankruptcy. the president's plan when it comes to entitlement reform is just quite frankly a joke so i don't think they're serious about finding a deal. >> so not really good language you're hearing soledad. house speaker john boehner said he found the proposal flabbergasting. he said it's not serious. but you definitely have the white house here and democrats feeling that they have some leverage. they look at polls that show americans are more prepared to blame republicans because of the impasse and also the fact that the consequence
that's out there and that wouldn't make up for our deficit. >> no, but the president's plan of raising taxes on the rich, let's assume even he has his way. let's assume republicans go along with his plan. that at best raises about $70 billion a year. that leaves us with a trillion dollar deficit. this puts the president i think in a little bit of a hole. if the republicans give his way, what's plan "b"? what do we do next to deal with the deficit? the president and tim geithner basically this weekend said we've got plans to cut entitlements by 400 bill or ion 500 billion dollars. that's over ten years. we have a much bigger hole than i think anyone in washington is willing to agree is such a problem. >> lrepublicans are angry the president laid out this plan that they say he knew would just inflame them. >> that's true. >> why toedon't republicans act like big boys and girls and present their own plan about how they specifically want to cut entitlements? isn't that how you negotiate? >> yes, but, of course, they've done that. that's the most curious thing to me. tim geithner said the r
a significant, balanced approach to reduce our deficit our nation needs. so, wolf, here at the white house, they received this letter earlier in the day. they've had time to process it and clearly the white house not seeing this as something that they want to even bargain with. they've been saying that the next move is up to speaker boehner. and they wanted to see specific details so that they could actually begin the negotiations. what we see in this statement is that they feel he did not provide those details. now, the speaker and the president will see each other tonight we think at a holiday reception here at the white house. we'll see if they will actually discuss this, wolf. >> all right. the republicans hated the democratic initial proposal. the white house hates the republican counterproposal. we'll have much more in our next hour, jessica, thank you. >>> and you're in "the situation room." happening now, president obama issued a clear warning to the president bashar al assad. there will be consequences if you use chemical weapons against your own people. new details of the tragedy
on the side. that was his look back in the day. critics are saying there is a deficit resemblance. i'll let you be the judge of that. this biopic has just been announced as the closing night film for the sundance film festival in january. it's calling the movie, quote, the true story of one of the greatest entrepreneurs in american history which chronicles the defining 30 years of steve jobs' life. it says it's, quote, candid, inspiring and personal. this is actually one of two movies coming out about steve jobs who died just a little over a year ago. aaron sorkin's writing a different movie based on the best-selling biography by walter isaackson. for now, ashton kuchar is the man and christine and zoraida, some people are questioning the casting of ashton as jobs. mostly because he's known for comedy. but you know, he's also famously tech savvy. he got out ahead of the curve on twitter. he now has 13 million followers plus. he's entrepreneurial, too, he has his own movie production company, all kinds of business ventures. maybe it's not so much of a stretch to see ashton as steve jobs. bac
, and of course hopefully reduce the deficit as well. very busy day there at the white house. on thursday, we have all our eyes on washington. two controversial changes in washington state, same-sex marriage becomes legal on thursday in washington state. we'll also be looking at marijuana. adults over 21 can legally carry up to an ounce of pot, sort of. the federal government still says pot is an illegal drug. that's how they're going to do it in washington on thursday. and on friday, we'll be watching for the jobs report. this is the november jobs report. in october, 171,000 jobs were add a added, you may recall. experts think superstorm sandy could affect this. a lot of people having a hard time getting around, power is out. really put a lot of folks behind. we'll see how that goes. on saturday, a big day for college football fans. heisman trophy winner will be announced. we'll find out who the best player in college football is. last year, can you remember who it is? nfl star robert griffin iii won the heisman. that's your week ahead. >>> well, his name was jordan davis, a 17-year-old boy who w
, of course, how to reduce the deficit. on thursday we'll have all eyes on washington actually. talking about same-sex marriage. two very controversial changes in washington. same-sex marriage will become legal there, and we'll also, of course, they'll be legalizing pot. those over 21 can carry up to an ounce of pot starting on thursday in washington. on friday yet another jobs report. the november jobs report this time. 171,000 jobs were added, you may recall, in october, but experts think that maybe superstorm sandy might have slowed the growth this time around. we'll see if that really does have any affect on that jobs report coming out on friday morning. on saturday college football fans pay close attention here. the heisman trophy winner will be announced. we'll find out who the best player in college football really is. >>> who was the only sitting president married in the white house. if you know the answer, tweet me@randi kaye cnn. we'll have the answer after this quick break. [ abdul-rashid ] i've been working since i was about 16. you know, one job or the other. the moment i could a
before the joint select committee on deficit reduction, i simply took the midpoint of the public offers to demonstrate where i thought a deal could be reached at the time. he's very much backing away from speaking boehner's letter, but the question i wanted the to ask you -- >> can we spend one more point on that? >> of course. >> what did he say? that was the midpoint of a compromise from the two. so, here's speaker boehner who is taking a new point on the compromise between the two sides and offered it and it's already flatly rejected? >> i think what he might be rejecting, sir, if i may -- >> no, i'm not talking abo about erskine bowles. >> i think what he's saying in his statement, this letter from speaker boehner does not represent his theerly, number one, but i think the line the white house is have been problems with, i believe i found it in page two of the speaker's letter, he says this. notably, the new revenue in the bowles plan would not be a i chiefed through higher taxes, which we continue to oppose and will not agree to in order to protect small businesses and our economy.
have a looming budget deficit. so you don't have to really be a rocket scientist to understand that the rich do have to pay more. taxes do have to be raised on the rich and i think that's why over 60% of the public in these polls are not only supportive of a tax increase on the rich, but also will blame the republicans if we go over the fiscal cliff. and this gives frankly, this gives the white house and this gives the obama administration much more bargaining leverage. >> grover norquist, here's the problem, it seems to me. again, as long as the posturing goes on with fairly ridiculous offers on both sides and lots of political rhetoric along the lines of well, they're not giving an inch, we're going backwards, you can't really go backwards from a position of complete standstill, as far as i'm concerned. as this goes on, the american economy stalls, wall street's nervous, the consumers that should be out there now buying lots of christmas presents and boosting the economy will be reticent because they'll be thinking hang on, what's going to happen come the end of the year, am
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 70 (some duplicates have been removed)